Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Should I get Vista?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 5:42

I'm getting a new computer and I'm not sure whether I should stick with XP or get Vista.  Besides, most of the problems are supposed to be fixed with SP1, right?  Also, how bad is that shit with DRM, or does that only apply to HD-DVD and Blu-ray?  Also, driver problems?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 5:54

Vista is malware. There's no reason to get it over Windows XP (if you must have your Windows), and plenty of reasons not to.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 7:18

stick with XP. vista is bad, evil, bloaty, and slow.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 13:49

Get Windows Server 2003.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 15:56

Vista is not even a year old, so do not touch it yet. Wait at least for SP1 and then wait again for over 9000 bugfixes for SP1, then it might actually be usable.
Well, it was like this with XP.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 16:06

>>5
Lol, Amerikkkan software.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 17:21

The computer I'm building has a quad-core.  Isn't Vista the only one that can properly utilize a quad-core with most programs?

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-27 19:41

>>7
No.  Linux and BSD both had multi-core capabilities years before the processors themselves entered the general market.  They are much better at utilizing the multiple cores; that's why Linux and BSD are used in servers and supercomputers rather than Windows.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 2:19

>>7
Looks like you're mixing up two things.

How efficiently the OS's scheduler assigns the multiple cores to running processes/threads is one thing.

How smart programs themselves are at using multiple cores (if they do at all) is another.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-28 19:26

Let's be serious, only gamers and professional video editors have quad-cores.

I doubt OP is the latter.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 4:30

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 4:31

delete the friends if ya could please

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 4:54

>>11-12
Poor baby got turned down? GTFO.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-29 18:16

Holy fuck that's a hot chick.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-30 9:00

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-30 18:17

Get Linux fag.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-30 18:30

I would say get Vista but wait for SP1, why I say get Vista because your asking a dumb question. If you don't know anything about Linux, then don't install it.

Or you can Install both and just Dual boot or use VMware.

Name: Anonymous 2007-11-30 23:13

If you want to install Vista, wait for the SP2.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-01 18:44

I have been using Vista for over half a year now. After removing all of the "extra bits", it became into a slightly more bloated version of XP. It runs fine with 512 MB of RAM on a Celeron computer.

However, more RAM would be strongly advisable. It has some nice bits that make using it nice, but not much I would call home about. Howeve, it does show some problems with ethernet cards and wireless, but nothing that can't be fixed.

I give it a D because of all the trouble it made me go through the first time I started using it.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-03 16:57

Get Vista if you enjoy being progressively more locked into Microsoft bullshit.

Heck, they've been holding back competition and innovation in the market for years, why stop now?

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-06 23:11

Get Vista, I've been using it since it came out. You need to remove a bunch of features for idiots (Biggest one being UAC) Then it will be usable. And for some games and programs you need to tinker with them to make them work; Just becuase its a new OS and they fixed many coding errors that people would use in XP. And besides... XP looks like a child's OS. Either get Vista or go back to Windows '98 FTW.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-07 13:34

>>20
You mean Linux has been holding back competition and innovation.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-07 18:41

>>22
lol wut

Fucking Microsoft shill.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-07 19:03

>>23
yhbt etc. i know this because he made a completely unqualified assertion which was likely to be designed to cause your type of response.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-08 4:57

Linux is so shitty you can't even give it away to the majority of people. Its free, easily available and you can get it set up in no time off a boot cd, but nobody wants it despite the constant linux spam these days. Face it, its shitty.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-08 6:14

>>25
completely unqualified assertion. do better.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-08 18:17

ITT trolls and Microsoft fags

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 6:12

>>26
I don't need to, anyone with half a clue knows its true.

Enjoy your subpar OS you tedious zealot fags.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 8:22

>>28
Enjoy your DRM, WGA calling home all the time and vendor lock-in.

Each Windows release has something to add to this list of anti-user "features", when are you going to realise that it's all bullshit?

I don't care if you don't like Linux, but those who swear by Windows are equally, if not more so, "tedious zealot fags".

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 13:33

>>29
YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 14:56

>>30
STFUGTFOOMGWTFLOLBBQKTHXBYETBH

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 16:36

NOBODY USES LINUX NO ONE NO ONE WANT TO LEARN TO USE IT ONLY NERD AND FAGGOTS USE IT
REAL MAN USE MS-DOS

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 21:08

>>28,32
unqualified assertion. do better.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-09 22:10

>>30
Unqualified assertion. Do better.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 0:28

>>33
>>34
unqualified assertion. do better.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 2:41

assert("NOBODY USES FUCKING LINUX BECAUSE IT SUCKS.");

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 6:45

>>29
Oh no acronyms, those will surely ruin my day. Nobody cares. Nobody apart from the bearded and obese that is.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 9:47

ITT unqualified assertions

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 13:06

Unqualified assertions are now a meme.

Name: Anonymous 2007-12-10 13:36

>>38
Unqualified assertion. Do better.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List